false lite spd Rev. June 4, 2011 AD...Rev. April 8, 2017

Home
Gravity Concepts
Create Momentum

Light Speed vs Special Relativity
RF Energy Concept

Constant Light Speed Assumption

Portuguese Translation**
by Diana Gomes
Ukrainian translation by Anna Matesh Polish translation by
Alice Slaba**

**Spanish Translation **
**Indonesian translation**
by **Jordon Silaen**
**
Macedonian translation by Katerina Nestiv
**Radiation Sys.>
Force Interactions >
Lite Spd vs SR > Double Force Paradox
>

Grav. Constants > 8-2016 Create Energy Grav. Links > Review Letters >

*
< Prev Pg
< Web site Contents
V Page Contents
Bottom \/
Next Pg >*

**Abstract ***This is a
public domain article. *

The
constant light speed tenet,...the complete foundation of Special Relativity, is
shown to be falsified by the following two facts:

- Light speed has been shown to be finite by Roemer circa 1676. The speed would have to be in-finite in order to appear constant to all observers in non-accelerating motion relative to the source.
- Special Relative theory stipulates that the constant light speed can
only be found and measured in a non-accelerating reference frame. It is
shown that non-accelerating reference frames
**do not exist**in our natural Universe.

The paper Light
Speed versus Special Relativity presents Olaf Roemer's 1676 AD Jupiter / Io data that
demonstrates that light speed is --"not"-- constant in relation to all
observers regardless of their motion in relation to the source.

Copy and Typo Corrections 5/17/2011

As claimed by Einstein the constant light speed hypothesis is only valid when observer and source are within a non-accelerating reference frame. The phrase “non accelerating reference frame” describes two possible scenarios:

- MUTUAL ACCELERATION: That neither source or observer could be under acceleration in relation to the other.
- UNIVERSAL ACCELERATION: That neither object could be under acceleration in relation to inertial space.

For the **Mutual Acceleration** scenario: The constant light speed assumption is
falsified by the fact that light speed is finite. Basic logic dictates that
light speed would have to be “infinite” in order for it to remain constant
for an observer, whether in motion or at rest, in relation to the source.
Corrections 5/17/2011

Ref. the “Light Speed versus Special Relativity” paper above. Roemer’s 1676
light speed data provides a “finite” speed of approximately
186 k miles / sec.

Regarding the **Universal Acceleration** scenario: The constant light speed
assumption is falsified by the fact that there is no place available in our
physical Universe where some form of accelerating force, gravitational or
orbital, does not exist for matter in relation to inertial space.
Furthermore, if such a "fictitious" inertial frame did exist the light speed
would still have to be infinite in order to appear constant for an observer
in motion in relation to the source.

The known types of acceleration existing within the Universe are:

- The Earth's surface is under centrifugal acceleration via daily rotation.
- Our Solar system is an accelerating inertial frame (orbital).
- Our Solar system orbits with the accelerating inertial frame of the Milky Way.
- Any object in outer (free ?) space will accelerate toward a dominant galaxy or Solar system.
- An accelerating expansion of the Universe via red shift data, "if true", would provide another form of an accelerating inertial frame encompassing our domain of existence.

Therefore the following chain of logic arises:

- Our physical Universe of reality demonstrates potential physical forces with the ability to cause acceleration in all space.
- The non-accelerating inertial frame is fictitious, and does not exist in our Universe.
- Therefore the Universal constant light speed assumption cannot be tested nor verified.
- Therefore; SR and GR concepts are not qualified for study within physical science or engineering.

The complete foundation of SR and GR is based on this un-testable constant
light speed hypothesis and its ad hoc qualification;

i.e.-- that the
**assumption** is only applicable in a non accelerating reference space, where
no one can look.

Regarding the Mutual Acceleration scenario above, there are three sets of data falsifying the constant light speed hypothesis within the inertial space of our Universe,-- provided in the "Light Speed versus Special Relativity" paper;

- Olaf Roemer's Io/Jupiter work of 1676 AD
- Astronomy On Line Io/Jupiter data1994 AD.
- NASA's work on the problem with data rates between the Cassini spacecraft and it's Titan lander Huygens. June 2001 AD

*
< Prev Pg
< Web site Contents
V Page Contents
Bottom \/*

The arithmetic of addition and subtraction and basic logic sufficient to judge a foot race are the only tools that are required to falsify the constant light speed hypothesis using the above data sets.

I confidently predict that not one set of data exists and a set cannot be produced for testing and proving the constant light speed hypothesis within:

- Our domain of reality.
- Claimed non-accelerating or accelerating frames, and,
- One-way or two-way speed tests.

It is well established and logical that un-testable assumptions, hypothesis and proclamations cannot be used as factual foundations for useable theories or laws in the rational studies and applications of physical science.

All contrary arguments **"with data"** claiming to demonstrate the infinite
speed of light and/or the constant light speed hypothesis are requested and
welcomed and will be promptly addressed with interest.

In regard to the above message, "Falsification of the Constant Light Speed Assumption", the argument has been raised that the paper falsifies SR but does not falsify GR.

The following two quotes support the view that General Relativity is directly dependent on Special Relativity, and therefore is also falsified.

This first quote is from "Understanding Relativity", Sartori, University of California Press, page 275, Copyright 1996 AD

*
< Prev Pg
< Web site Contents
V Page Contents
Bottom \/*

**Quote:** **The Geometry of Space-Time:**

".......We already know from special relativity that space and time are
intermixed; a space coordinate in one frame of reference corresponds to a
combination of space and time coordinates in another reference frame. Curvature
therefore cannot be confined to spatial dimensions. It is not three-dimensional
space but rather four-dimensional space-time that is curved according to general
relativity." **Unquote**

This indicates that the General Relative theory requires the existence of curved space-time...and space-time is a product of Special Relativity. Therefore when SR is falsified, General Relativity stands falsified.

This second following quote is from a letter Einstein sent to Erwin Finley-Freundlich dated August 1913.

**Quote:**"If the velocity of light is only a tiny bit dependent on the
velocity of the light source, then my whole theory of Relativity and Gravitation
is false". **Unquote**

This quote from Einstein provides independent evidence supporting the fact that General Relativity is dependent on the false constant light speed assumption and the falsified Special Relativity.

Therefore; ...the falsification of Special Relativity automatically
**falsifies General Relativity**, per the above quotes by the following authorities:

Dr. Albert Einstein, Author of the General Relativity Theory

Dr. Leo Sartori,
Professor, University of Nebraska

Editors,
University of California Press, circa 1996

*< Prev Pg
< Web site Contents
V Page Contents
Bottom \/*

Calculation of the Double Force Paradox, which is independent of the above constant light speed issue, falsifies all mass attraction concepts, including General Relativity, as viable causes of gravitation.

It is notable that Johannes Kepler, Isaac Newton and Olaf Roemer provided all of the facts and data required to support this message by the late 1600's. For more than two hundred years prior to the 1905 constant light speed assumption and more than three hundred years prior to the current decade, 2010,---this information has been in the public domain and is readily available on the internet.

*The content of this web page authored by me, Stanley Byers, is granted to be in the public
domain.* ***

Stanley Byers

*
< Prev Pg
< Web site Contents
V Page Contents
Top /\
Next Pg >*

Abstract

The Constant Light Speed Assumption

Falsification of
the Light Speed Assumption

Falsification of General Relativity

The Second
Falsification of General Relativity

Links used above:

http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/litespd_vs_sr.htm

http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/roemlitexls.htm#Astronomy On Line Data

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/releases/2001/cassini_010629.html

sbyers11@comcast.net